Prev: FT III Ideas Next: Re: Maximizing ship designs

Re: Odd Tons (was Damn the Torp...)

From: Joachim Heck - SunSoft <jheck@E...>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 10:04:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Odd Tons (was Damn the Torp...)

Ground Zero Games writes:

@:) I guess one of the most logical ways to do it is simply to ban
@:) odd-numbererd mass ships!! :)


@:) More seriously, of the options you suggested I think the last one
@:) sounds best - round systems space down and damage boxes up; but
@:) please don't take this as gospel - it might be interesting to
@:) allow either way, as long as one factor (system mass or damage) is
@:) rounded down and the other up - gives players yet another choice
@:) to make....

  We've had pretty good luck with the opposite - we round systems
space up and damage boxes down.  We (my gaming group) argued this for
a while and decided that it made sense - the slightly smaller ship can
carry the same weapons load but it has to sacrifice cargo space, crew
quarters, etc to do it - and those are the parts of the ship soaking
up damage in battle.

  This seems to work but I think it would be nice if there were a
fewer "rounding error" problems of this sort.  We have the odd mass
problem, the odd thrust problem, the odd turn problem and none of them
are explicitly resolved in the rules.  The examples seem to avoid
these problems as well.  Perhaps these would be issues worth looking
at for FTIII.  They're not major but what it boils down to is that
every group has to decide very basic game issues in their own way and
you end up with people who have very different ideas about how very
simple aspects of the game work.

  "Ensign!  Ahead one-third!"
  "Captain, that speed's not divisible by two...."
  "Damn!  All right, ensign, ahead one-third plus one!"
  "Very good sir!"


Prev: FT III Ideas Next: Re: Maximizing ship designs